Jul 2007
Selling Jesus
07/30/07 17:49 Categories: Church
So, when did we come up with the idea that we can evangelize without relationships? Was it from the strategies of advertising agencies? If you send out enough information, you will get some percentage of response. Then, we don’t have to worry about maintaining relationships: we just have to focus on getting as much information ‘out there’ and hoping that it sinks in some-where. Corporate Christianity, here I come.
|
Frank Pastore
07/30/07 14:13 Categories: Church
I almost cried today. And is not because Emily still isn’t home. It’s because of this article. It is written by Frank Pastore, a radio personality on KKLA 99.5 in Los Angeles. He is a Christian talk show host who generally makes me frustrated whenever Emily makes me listen to him (He makes her mad too, but she likes to get made every once in a while… or something like that). Well, this article kinda did it in for me. It is so frustrating.
Pastore’s thesis is that moderate and liberal Christians, though to be fair he only refers to the “emergent church”, “don’t like truth, knowledge, science, authority, doctrine, institutions or religion.” Wow! If that isn’t enough to get a tear in your eye, well kick yourself and pretend. This is a pretty popular personality, who represents a good majority of conservative Christians, basically claiming that some other Christians are… essentially evil. Well, I’ll let you read the article yourself.
I just find it extremely frustrating that we Christians just sit here bickering and hurting each other. We don’t trust each other, and that is probably because we do not know each other. The camps do not form relationships, they just lob bombs over the dead zone and try to destroy each other via a barage of words. Yeah, that solves a lot.
Oh, and in other words, the Pope thinks evolution is valid. Yay!
Oh, and in other words, the Pope thinks evolution is valid. Yay!
A Little Bit Incoherent? The Journey of Faith
So, there are many questions to be asked in life. Some important. Some not. Some I’m interested in. Some I’m not. What an intro! I better redeem this by writing something good.
So, as events of life conspire I am forced to ask a question: what sort of faith does God call us to? I suppose this is the sort of question that cannot be written ‘in general’. It must be fixedly pointed into a context, into a personality, into a person. Thus, what sort of faith is God calling me to?
This comes up from noting a good friend who understands faith in a very different way than I do. This vision of faith seems to me to be oriented around trying to hear what God is saying and then following that. Alone, this seems like a good policy for living a life of faith. But then there is a conjunctive assumption: that God is always speaking, that there is always, or nearly so, a path to which God is calling. This may well be the case for my friend, but I have come to find this sort of following of faith impossible for my own life, and even more, I find it undesirable.
It seems to me that the way of faith is a way of growing into a personality distinct but co-creative, co-redemptive and co-righteous with God. We are created to pursue creativity, to pursue redemption not only in our lives but helping others to heal and forgive and be forgiven, and to be righteous. These are co-activities with God, not only activities of God or activities on our own. It should be readily obvious that we cannot accomplish these on our own, but should it actually be the case that these are solely matters for God to be concerned with and shape in us? That is a tempting conclusion to come to, and it is enticing. At the very least though, I think we have to be receptive to God’s work. We have to give our yes (not always, but often), or else God will not work. That is why faith is critical to healing: we have to yell after Jesus sometimes and demand that he heal us. That is why the poor father comes to Jesus begging for belief: if he does not ask, he does not receive.
We are in this together. Not only us and God, but us and each other. The pursuit of God, the pursuit of faith is something that requires others. A dear friend, Jay, once told me, “A friend is someone who reminds you of the song of your heart when you have forgotten it.” We all forget our heart-song sometimes. We all need friends to help us on the way.
Donny reminded yesterday of the parable of the talents. The story says that God gives us some talents and then leaves. We are then left two options. We can use those talents as well as we can and try to multiply them. Or we can walk the path of fear. We can bury our talent, so at least we won’t lose the little we have. This path of fear is deeply condemned by Jesus. We are to live lives of risk, lives seeking to use our creativity in order to walk the paths of redemption and righteousness.
So what does it mean for me to walk the path of faith? A small bit of the answer is this: I need to live open to the moving of the Spirit, but also God desires for me to be a dependent, rational human fully engaged in the responsibility of my decisions (ethically and otherwise), by which I am also invited and able to do and be the work of the kingdom.
Barry Bonds and the Honor of the MLB
07/27/07 21:25 Categories: Sports
Alright, I have a platform, a box on the corner, and so I get to put out my opinions. I do not like Barry Bonds. I’m a huge fan of Major League Baseball. I love going to Dodger games, following the league, and all the wonderful statistics (it is possible that Baseball is my favorite spectator sport because of the plethora of numbers and stats, but I leave such analysis for another time). The reality is, the sport has been a bit blemished for the past… decade? It was in 1998 that McGwire broke that hallowed record - the single season homerun record, eclipsing Roger Maris’ 61 hrs with 70 of his own. That was a great season. McGwire and Sosa were chasing that record, each taking a lead at different parts of the season, before McGwire put it away. Sosa still hit an amazing 66 hrs, but it wasn’t enough. Then, six years ago in 2001, Bonds decided that such a historic record should belong to him, and he swatted 73 out of parks around the States. An interesting little fact: Hank Aaron’s highest single season was 47 hrs (which just goes to show how long he played for).
So, we enter 2007 with more steroid scandals and the like. MLB has been tarnished with such ‘performance-enhancing’ allegations. It is really a travesty. And so I have two suggestions for the restoration of honor. Bonds represents the pinnacle of steroids and performance enhancement. There is no doubt that he has taken steroids, albeit he ‘didn’t know’ that’s what he was taking - he just happened to gain somewhat and start whacking the ball out of the park. Just check out the jumps in 1990 and 2000. Coincidence? I very highly doubt it. Enough of the allegations and speculation and onto the solutions.
Solution 1:
Bonds hits 755, and then retires. He gives back the rest of his salary and goes home. He ties the record, but he has the decency not to break it. Now, the odds of the this happening: 0.000000001 to 1. Why? Because Bonds is extremely driven, competitive, and really wants that record. He has gone through hell to get it: from emotional attacks to his body breaking down. He is not going to stop until he has passed this record, and we may even see him again next year.
Solution 2:
Every pitcher in the MLB intentionally walks Bonds for the rest of the season. Let him hit 755 and that is it. Don’t even pitch to him. What would this accomplish? It would keep the record intact for ARod to break in a few years (ARod will probably break any record Bonds sets, but that is the not point here, the point is the honor of the game). Moreover, it would send a clear message both to Bonds and to all those who have felt the dishonor to this excellent sport. ‘Yeah, some of us messed up and sought our own personal gain over the integrity and love of the game, but we are making up for it now. We are all clean, and we mean business.” And, who cares about the walks record? That sort of a stat is quite fitting for Bonds.
Half-way There (Living on a Prayer)
07/21/07 21:06 Categories: Family
So, Emily has been gone for two weeks, and there are two more to go. It hasn’t been as hard as I though it would be, but at the same time I have been lonely. It’s funny how used to someone you get and then when they are gone, how much you miss them. Times are especially hard when I go somewhere that we generally are at together. Then when I am driving or walking home, I really miss Emily. I miss talking with her. I miss her silliness and fun. I miss her laugh and smile. Its also especially hard in the evenings. I have been getting a lot of reading done. But now dominoes. They are sitting sadly on the dining room table. I don’t want to put them away. They are there. Ready for a game. Two more weeks. Then they will clink together again.
I love you Emily.
I love you Emily.
Torches Together by Mewithoutyou
07/20/07 20:56 Categories: Poetry and Music
Why burn poor and lonely under a bowl or under a lampshade
Or on the shelf beside the bed
Where at night you lay turning like a door on its hinges?…
First on your left side, then on your right side…
then your left side again.
Why burn poor and lonely?
Tell all the stones we’re gonna make a building…
We’ll be cut into shape and set into place
Or if you’d rather be a window,
I’ll gladly be the frame,
Reflecting any kind words, we’ll let in all their blame…
And ruin our reputation all the same.
So never mind our plan making, we’ll start living…
Anyway, aren’t you unbearably sad?
Then why burn so poor and lonely?
We’ll be like torches
We’ll be torches together
We’ll be like torches…
with whatever respect our tattered dignity demands,
Torches together… hand in hand.
Why pluck one string…
what good is just one note?
Oh, one string sounds fine, I guess…
but we were once ‘one notes’,
We were lonely wheat quietly ground into grain…
What light and momentary pain!
So why the safe distance, this curious look?
Why tear out single pages when you can throw away the book?
Why pluck one string when you can strum the guitar?
Strum the guitar…
with no beginning, with no end.
Take down the guitar and strum the guitar!
Strum the guitar if you’re afraid.
And I’m afraid and everyone’s afraid and everyone knows it,
But we don’t have to be afraid anymore.
You played the flute, but no one was dancing,
You sang a sad song… but none of us cried.
You played the flute, but no one was dancing,
And you sang a sad song, and none of us cried.
You played the flute, but no one was dancing,
You sang a sad song… but none of us cried.
You played the flute, but no one was dancing,
And you sang a sad song… you sang such a sad song.
Or on the shelf beside the bed
Where at night you lay turning like a door on its hinges?…
First on your left side, then on your right side…
then your left side again.
Why burn poor and lonely?
Tell all the stones we’re gonna make a building…
We’ll be cut into shape and set into place
Or if you’d rather be a window,
I’ll gladly be the frame,
Reflecting any kind words, we’ll let in all their blame…
And ruin our reputation all the same.
So never mind our plan making, we’ll start living…
Anyway, aren’t you unbearably sad?
Then why burn so poor and lonely?
We’ll be like torches
We’ll be torches together
We’ll be like torches…
with whatever respect our tattered dignity demands,
Torches together… hand in hand.
Why pluck one string…
what good is just one note?
Oh, one string sounds fine, I guess…
but we were once ‘one notes’,
We were lonely wheat quietly ground into grain…
What light and momentary pain!
So why the safe distance, this curious look?
Why tear out single pages when you can throw away the book?
Why pluck one string when you can strum the guitar?
Strum the guitar…
with no beginning, with no end.
Take down the guitar and strum the guitar!
Strum the guitar if you’re afraid.
And I’m afraid and everyone’s afraid and everyone knows it,
But we don’t have to be afraid anymore.
You played the flute, but no one was dancing,
You sang a sad song… but none of us cried.
You played the flute, but no one was dancing,
And you sang a sad song, and none of us cried.
You played the flute, but no one was dancing,
You sang a sad song… but none of us cried.
You played the flute, but no one was dancing,
And you sang a sad song… you sang such a sad song.
On the Supernatural
So the other day I was asked what the explanation was of the manna in the desert. The manna was a bready sort of food that seemed like it was made of coriander that God sent every night with the dew, and the Israelites collected it in the morning to eat for the day. The point of the question is not simply about the nature of this manna, or why God had to send it (they were wandering across the desert and had no food). The point of the question is about worldview, about the miraculous, about how and if God acts in this world. It is a necessary question. It is necessary because I have never seen manna. I have never seen anything so blatanct. There are things that I would consider God acting, stories and experiences that were so coincidental.
The problem seems to remain though: we have so many stories of God acting in such, well, blatant ways. Ways that are impossible to ignore or deny. The Bible is replete with them, but where are they now? I do not mean that they do not occur now, though for most people in the States we never witness them. There are stories from Africa, Latin America, Asia. But we condiser these folks pre-scientific, less sophisticated. There ahve been numerous scientific studies into miracles and all have come up with the same result: they could be explained in physical ways. Now, I have no problem with this sort of a conclusion. Just because something can be explained in physical terms does not mean that it was an act of God. The philosophers of the 1900s showed us that we have no reason to expect God to act in any other way (interventionist vs. immanentism, cf. Nancey Murphy’s Beyond Liberalism and Fundamentalism).
The real question is does God that way? Can we really believe that these miracles occur? Can we really believe that in history manna fell in the desert? Most important of all, can we really believe that Jesus rose from the dead? Not just a rising in a metaphorical sense in his follower’s minds and hearts, but in a bodily, I’m-walking-around-and-eating sort of way.
This really seems to come down to worldview. If we believe in God… if we think that S/He is personal, caring, loving… if we believe these things, it would not be a question of whether these sorts of miracles happen. It would be a question of why they do not happen more. It all breaks down to different worldviews, and these worldviews require the same amount of faith as each other. This is something that perhaps we don’t talk about enough. It takes just as much faith in the scientific worldview/tradition as in a religious worldview/tradition. So then it becomes a choice. A choice between which faith is the better faith, the more rational faith, the more believable faith. And that choice takes time, intentional pursuit, and hope that we are able to settle on an answer.
Using Silence
Currently Emily and I don’t have a church. There are a great many reasons for this unfortunate happenstance, but all of them still amount to the same thing: we don’t belong to a church. Lately we have been hanging out at Basilea, which is an awesome, haphazard community of believers who are loosely connected. It might be called a house church, but that is implying more structure than there is. Although I find the community at Basilea is amazing an awesome, there is a part of me that also wants that good, consistent sunday morning worship (or sunday night, or saturday night…) I think the main thing is the consistency (both on our part and on the community’s part) of meeting weekly. Of singing some good worship songs that are not self-centered, of praying for each other, of being together intentionally communing with God.
The funny thing is that all of that is just a segue into what I really wanted to talk about. Silence. There are two points here. When we have looked at churches, one thing I like to do is check out the statement of faith. So often churches try to define very rigidly what they believe and why they believe it (generally Bible references). There is a lack of silence in our beliefs. This is further emphasized by a lack of silence in our church services. Let me expound.
It has been an attempt of theologians since… forever to try and systematize our belief system into propositions about God and humanity and Jesus, the trinity and the church, about sin and forgiveness. We have spent hundreds of years trying to sort everything out like the perfect solution would be a theology that looked more like an equation. Then, when you want to figure out what you believe about something or what to do in some situation, it has been systematized such that you plug in the variables and out pops the solution. Slowly but surely we have been realizing that this is impossible. Moreover, God doesn’t seem to be very interested in it either. If he was, then Jesus might have taught a bit more systematically. The most systematic teaching we get is the Sermon on the Mount which is anything but!
Thus my plea for silence. Instead of trying to input so many beliefs, we should just rest on the four or five or six solid truths that are non-speculative (as far as the Bible is concerned). I’m not sure what those would be but something like:
God made us (Note this can be creation or directed evolution)
God loves us
Jesus died for us (I don’t know how his death serves as propitiation or expiation or any other atonement theory)
Jesus was resurrected (the only miracle that we must insist upon - although once you believe this, others become more plausible/believable)
There is a heaven (is there a hell? Probably, but I sure hope not. Or if there is, I hope Satan is the only one in it. I like Moltmann’s idea that because of Jesus, God sees all of humanity through the eyes of forgiveness - that is, why do you have to affirm Jesus to be saved by his death? Does that death not work for all sin for all humanity? The point here is that all this stuff in the parentheses is speculative and should not be understood as authoritative.)
This sort of a silence in our theology affirms that there is much that we do not know. It affirms our humanity. It affirms our finite nature. It affirms that we are not God or gods. In a very similar way, silence (done well) can be just as helpful in church. Not only between prayers, but also intentional moments/spaces of reflection. Maybe this is especially so in America where life goes too fast, where we have cars and trains and planes and high-speed internet. A little time for the soul, a little time for rest, relaxation, relationship… well, that sure sounds good to me.
This sort of a silence in our theology affirms that there is much that we do not know. It affirms our humanity. It affirms our finite nature. It affirms that we are not God or gods. In a very similar way, silence (done well) can be just as helpful in church. Not only between prayers, but also intentional moments/spaces of reflection. Maybe this is especially so in America where life goes too fast, where we have cars and trains and planes and high-speed internet. A little time for the soul, a little time for rest, relaxation, relationship… well, that sure sounds good to me.
One Can Be the Loneliest Number...
07/07/07 21:08 Categories: Family
So, Emily left today for Brasil. I’m super stoked for her, but it still sucks no matter how we cut the cake. We have only been married for a little over a year, but it still is so hard to even spend one night away from each other. Four weeks? Impossible. To be honest, I think I am a bit depressed about it. I have every hope of getting a ton of my goals/assignments for the summer done, but I think it will take a day or more to get started on it all. At least Anna and my grandparents are coming into town. That will give me some good family time.
That said, I have nothing else to add.
The System
07/06/07 13:10 Categories: Environment | Economics
There are many problems with capitalism. We all know that. We also are pretty sure that it is the best economic system out there. I wonder though if we are going to enter a period where we have to careful with the environment, if capitalism won’t kill us. My ponderance is centered on the nature of capitalism as a system that is only successful as things are bought and sold. It gets to the point, evidenced by any tour of walmart, target or the grocery store, where we begin to make and sell junk in order to continue to profit. A country’s economic success is based on how much stuff it can buy. The problem is, that seems to entail production simply for production’s sake and thus ignores the effect that it has on the environment. A carbon tax is one way where that gets evened out, but not in terms of the ‘rape of the natural world’. Thus, in order for capitalism to continue, we must create more things to sell, which then further impacts the environment.
A similar problem seems to happen with the whole globalization business. As we globalize, companies are able to send work to other places where the people are willing to work for a cheaper wage. Although I’m not convinced that this impacts the countries that the jobs migrate from (for instance, the U.S. has had some of its lowest unemployment recently), but there seem to be few safeguards that the multinationals will pay living wages. Many think that the market will even it out, but that does not seem to be the case - as evidenced by a good 20 solid years of globalization and little effect throughout much of the 2/3s world. For instance, I know of no place where I can buy some jeans, even for a bit more money, while knowing that whoever made it has been paid a fair wage (i.e., fair trade). There does not seem to be enough demand to make it worthwhile. I suppose shopping 2nd hand would be a good solution.
A similar problem seems to happen with the whole globalization business. As we globalize, companies are able to send work to other places where the people are willing to work for a cheaper wage. Although I’m not convinced that this impacts the countries that the jobs migrate from (for instance, the U.S. has had some of its lowest unemployment recently), but there seem to be few safeguards that the multinationals will pay living wages. Many think that the market will even it out, but that does not seem to be the case - as evidenced by a good 20 solid years of globalization and little effect throughout much of the 2/3s world. For instance, I know of no place where I can buy some jeans, even for a bit more money, while knowing that whoever made it has been paid a fair wage (i.e., fair trade). There does not seem to be enough demand to make it worthwhile. I suppose shopping 2nd hand would be a good solution.
July 4
07/05/07 17:32 Categories: Politics
So, maybe it is a bit passe to critique this country. I know I’m good at it. But at the same time, this week where we celebrate our indpendence is an excelled opportunity for some critical thinking.
I’m not a political scholar, nor a politican, but as a concerned citizen, there are some aspects of the United States that I really worry about. The first of these has to do with my own camp: the Christians. (Even that Christians are considered a camp is a huge problem) The Religious Right/Moral Majority has a tendency to push two policies: abortion and homosexuality. These issues are used to create a moral image whereby those who agree are considered God-fearing and safe. Those that do not agree with the supplied stance are abused, ignored, or maligned. Instead of creating any sort of unity, the divide between these opinions seems to have grown to a point where discussion, argument or disagreement is impossible. The issues are more important than the community. Theologically, the unacceptable nature of this attitude is evident. I do not mean that the religious right is not right in their stances, but being right is never as important as being loving.
This attitude is exhibited on the left as well as the right. The ability to compromise for the sake of others is slipping away. The predicament of our current government should suffice. Because Congress is dominated by Democrats and our president is a Republican, less has been done because of the lack of ability to compromise. Why is this? Surely the issues today are not any more serious or dire than in previous generations or decades. Neither is it the case that people are more passionate about the issues. But there seems to be a part of the attitude with which the sides engage with each other that is different. What I mean is that we have forgotten that both sides are trying to fight for the good of our country. Both the left and the right (and those caught in the middle) have a serious belief that their policies are beneficial.
The good things for me now would be to suggest some sort of a solution. That I do not have. I wonder if the problems are not systemic. Because things require a 50%+1 vote to pass, the goal becomes attaining the majority which (due to a non-parliamentary system) does not require alliances but pure warfare. I am not suggesting that the parliamentary system does not have similar problems, but the left and right are generally co-opted by the extremes (like the religious right) and people in the middle are left without a candidate. For instance, there are 20 semi-possible candidates for our next presidency, and probably 6 serious candidates. If we look at these 6 candidates (Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Romney, Guiliani, McCain), they vary so incredibly that it is hard to believe that they are split into two parties.
So, I suppose I’m arguing that a sort of solution is a parliamentary system. The problem is such a system will not solve our issues! They may aid a form of dialogue over warfare by forcing coalitions and alliances, but the deeper issue seems to be a lack of grace and concern for the ‘other-side’. This is a deeper problem with which I will not concern myself.
Tired, this must conclude the critique. I’m sure I will engage with this more, but not at this time!
I’m not a political scholar, nor a politican, but as a concerned citizen, there are some aspects of the United States that I really worry about. The first of these has to do with my own camp: the Christians. (Even that Christians are considered a camp is a huge problem) The Religious Right/Moral Majority has a tendency to push two policies: abortion and homosexuality. These issues are used to create a moral image whereby those who agree are considered God-fearing and safe. Those that do not agree with the supplied stance are abused, ignored, or maligned. Instead of creating any sort of unity, the divide between these opinions seems to have grown to a point where discussion, argument or disagreement is impossible. The issues are more important than the community. Theologically, the unacceptable nature of this attitude is evident. I do not mean that the religious right is not right in their stances, but being right is never as important as being loving.
This attitude is exhibited on the left as well as the right. The ability to compromise for the sake of others is slipping away. The predicament of our current government should suffice. Because Congress is dominated by Democrats and our president is a Republican, less has been done because of the lack of ability to compromise. Why is this? Surely the issues today are not any more serious or dire than in previous generations or decades. Neither is it the case that people are more passionate about the issues. But there seems to be a part of the attitude with which the sides engage with each other that is different. What I mean is that we have forgotten that both sides are trying to fight for the good of our country. Both the left and the right (and those caught in the middle) have a serious belief that their policies are beneficial.
The good things for me now would be to suggest some sort of a solution. That I do not have. I wonder if the problems are not systemic. Because things require a 50%+1 vote to pass, the goal becomes attaining the majority which (due to a non-parliamentary system) does not require alliances but pure warfare. I am not suggesting that the parliamentary system does not have similar problems, but the left and right are generally co-opted by the extremes (like the religious right) and people in the middle are left without a candidate. For instance, there are 20 semi-possible candidates for our next presidency, and probably 6 serious candidates. If we look at these 6 candidates (Clinton, Obama, Edwards, Romney, Guiliani, McCain), they vary so incredibly that it is hard to believe that they are split into two parties.
So, I suppose I’m arguing that a sort of solution is a parliamentary system. The problem is such a system will not solve our issues! They may aid a form of dialogue over warfare by forcing coalitions and alliances, but the deeper issue seems to be a lack of grace and concern for the ‘other-side’. This is a deeper problem with which I will not concern myself.
Tired, this must conclude the critique. I’m sure I will engage with this more, but not at this time!
Hello Web
07/03/07 16:45 Categories: Theology
So, here it goes. I’m starting a blog. I am not sure why. Everyone is doing it? I suppose part of it is that I wish I had a more documented history of my thoughts (yeah, i’m like that). I’m almost done with two years of seminary, and I am ambivalent when I look back on the experience. Don’t misunderstand - I would never change my decision to go to Fuller, I’m more ambivalent about my intellectual development. I wish I had questioned more. I wish I had pushed and delved and considered and gotten to the heart of issues. I wish I had thought a bit more critically - but then, that may be a legitimate concern for the rest of my life. So, here I am. About to push out into a job, but still feeling… unsure, not fully capable. Well, such is life.
So, I suppose it is always helpful to a mission/purpose for new ventures, otherwise they seem to lose focus and dribble out of view. So, what is my purpose? I think it is to try and wrestle on paper. Get sweaty, smelly, and otherwise silly looking for the purpose of seeking truth. I don’t have any expectations of anyone else reading this stuff. I think it is mainly for me and if it blesses others, sweet!
A secondary purpose might be to try and connect my thoughts, iron out my intellectual inconsistencies and ponder the mysteries of the universe!
That said, I’m going to take a nap. This is all very tiring.
So, I suppose it is always helpful to a mission/purpose for new ventures, otherwise they seem to lose focus and dribble out of view. So, what is my purpose? I think it is to try and wrestle on paper. Get sweaty, smelly, and otherwise silly looking for the purpose of seeking truth. I don’t have any expectations of anyone else reading this stuff. I think it is mainly for me and if it blesses others, sweet!
A secondary purpose might be to try and connect my thoughts, iron out my intellectual inconsistencies and ponder the mysteries of the universe!
That said, I’m going to take a nap. This is all very tiring.